Transcript
A (0:02)
You're listening to the cyberwire network. Powered by n2k.
B (0:11)
This exclusive N2K Pro Subscriber only episode of CISO Perspectives has been unlocked for all Cyberwire listeners through the generous support of Meter building full stack zero trust networks from the ground up. Trusted by security and network leaders everywhere, Meter delivers fast, secure by design and scalable connectivity without the frustration, friction, complexity and cost of managing an endless proliferation of vendors and tools. Meter gives your enterprise a complete networking stack, secure, wired, wireless and cellular in one integrated solution built for performance, resilience and scale. Go to meter.com CISOP today to learn more and book your demo. That's M-E T E R.com CISOP Foreign. Welcome back to CISO Perspectives. I'm Kim Jones and I'm thrilled that you're here for this season's journey. This past season, we've pulled the deep conversations out of the conference bar to tackle these complex issues from every conceivable angle. Throughout this season, we have examined many of the challenges surrounding the cyber talent ecosystem. Today we explore the question how do we address talent strategically? Let's get into it. In one of my last corporate gigs, I was tasked with standardizing how we hired security talent. Specifically, I needed to answer the question how do we attract, integrate, train and retain top tier cyber talent in the company? Despite being in business for over four decades, this was the first time the company had undertaken a truly strategic approach to to its cyber talent needs. As this is a passion point of mine. Shocking, I know. I dug into the challenge with zeal. My first stop was our job descriptions. We had recently done an overhaul of the security, job, family and associated descriptions, but I was concerned that we had not normalized the knowledge, skill, ability and experience or KSAE requirements against any of the standard frameworks out there, such as the NICE framework. For the better part of two months, I worked with an external firm to dissect the job description levels and requirements and mapped them to the NICE framework. I came away with some interesting conclusions. Turns out that less than 70% of our brand new job descriptions were mapped to existing NICE KSAEs. In at least one case, over 80% of the requirements for the position were skills and abilities not found within the technical cyber ksaes. As I said to my peers, I'm not advocating that you change the job descriptions again, but we as a corporation needed to understand the impact of having non standard job descriptions on our ability to recruit new talent and retain existing talent. In the latter case, we would be advancing individuals along a growth path that would make them viable for work only within our corporate ecosystem, which for those savvy enough to realize this, would impede their ability to be hired into other organizations should their positions be eliminated. Here my next target was our marketing efforts, specifically evangelizing within the cybersecurity community as subject matter experts. This meant not only blogging and publishing white papers, but also speaking at conferences and industry events. While the company had mechanisms for accomplishing this for its technology and development teams, it struggled to figure out how to support these activities for its security personnel in any organized fashion. Marketing the efforts of key security engineers and other individuals seemed an anathema to the organization. Further, getting approval to speak at conferences was usually a months long effort with the legal and communications teams that would result in delays beyond the point of conference submission and or accept states. Several of our team senior personnel, myself included, found ourselves either leaving the speaking circuit altogether or speaking as non affiliated experts working for our own LLCs. It took another three months of pushing molasses uphill to get approval streamlined so we could actually showcase our talent without making the legal team apoplectic. My last hurdle was training. Surprisingly, the budget regarding training was the easy conversation. At this time. The executive for whom I worked recognized that we needed to spend on training if we wanted to grow and improve our capabilities. The challenge, of course, was how much to spend and what to spend our budget on. To me, this felt fairly straightforward. I first needed to find a training provider that all of my peers agreed provided quality training and education. Next, I approached that provider with my job descriptions and the KSAEs for them and told the provider that they needed to map our KSAEs to their courses so I could see which courses would allow our existing talent to grow their skills. A month later, the detailed mapping was complete. I then negotiated a bulk discount for the training that was most relevant to our needs and put an enterprise contract in place. Lastly, I distributed the course to KSE MAP to my peers so they could plan their training for their respective teams accordingly. The end result of this six month labor of love was a focused, strategic approach to security talent. Everything I had done was simply a repeat of approaches I had taken as a CISO in previous companies. Yet at every turn, from my peers to my boss to the marketing teams to the training provider, I heard the same refrain. No one has ever asked us to do this before. Most security organizations have a somewhat bipolar relationship with skills and training. On the one hand, security leaders readily recognize the importance of a well trained resource. On the other hand, training is often Viewed merely as a perk to reward individuals, training budgets are often the first thing sacrificed in times of fiscal belt tightening. Leaders often do not understand what training is best suited to advance an employee's skills either in their current function or to prepare them for a future role. And many leaders fear training in developing their team members past a certain point out of concern that they'll become more valuable targets for another corporation or organization to steal away. Remember that the current cybersecurity paradigm is to steal talent rather than to grow it internally. Benjamin Franklin said, failing to plan is planning to fail. This truism also applies to talent and training. As security professionals, we need to start linking the pieces of the talent chain together if we ever wish to break out of the non virtuous talent theft cycle we are currently in. This means 1 getting serious about KSAE based job descriptions 2 making training a necessity, not just a perk 3 mapping training to planned advancement in skills and abilities 4 holding your teams accountable for demonstrating and executing upon these heightened skills and abilities after training and five Expending the resources, starting with our time, to plan to turn our teams into talent creation engines. My $0.02. On today's episode I'm excited to sit down with Jeff Walden. Jeff is the CEO and Founder of Skillrex and has been working for years to address how the industry evaluates both perspective and existing talent. Today's conversation revolves around examining how we as an industry evaluate talent and ask the question, how do we address talent strategically? Let's get into it. Jeff, thanks for taking the time and welcome. It's great to see you again man.
![Strategic approaches to talent: A practical guide. [CISOP] - CyberWire Daily cover](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmegaphone.imgix.net%2Fpodcasts%2Fbe96dc70-23a6-11f1-a0c1-efbb0655be8e%2Fimage%2F4576c79a6260b29daaff0ea0480913c0.png%3Fixlib%3Drails-4.3.1%26max-w%3D3000%26max-h%3D3000%26fit%3Dcrop%26auto%3Dformat%2Ccompress&w=1920&q=75)